高职教师付出−获得不平衡水平与职业倦怠的关系：自我控制能力的调节作用

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2025.03.018

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探讨高职教师付出−获得不平衡水平、自我控制能力与职业倦怠的关系，采用付出−获得不平衡量表、职业倦怠问卷和自我控制量表对全国37个市的1192名高职教师进行调查。研究结果显示：(1)付出−获得平衡状态(0<ERR<1)和付出−获得不平衡状态(ERR>1)下，付出−获得不平衡比率均对职业倦怠有显著正向预测作用。(2)自我控制能力在高职教师付出−获得不平衡与职业倦怠之间起调节作用。其中，在付出−获得平衡状态(0<ERR<1)下，自我控制能力具有正向调节作用；在付出−获得不平衡状态(ERR>1)下，自我控制能力具有负向调节作用。研究结果揭示了付出−获得不平衡与高职教师职业倦怠的关系及其机制，对改善高职教师职业倦怠现象具有一定实践参考价值。

关键词: 付出?获得不平衡, 职业倦怠, 自我控制能力, 高职教师

Abstract:

This study investigated the relationships between the effort-reward imbalance level, self-control ability, and job burnout among vocational college teachers. A total of 1192 vocational college teachers from 37 cities across the country were surveyed by using the Effort-Reward Imbalance Scale, the Job Burnout Scale, and the Self-Control Scale. The results showed that: 1) In both effort-reward balanced (0 < ERR < 1) and imbalanced (ERR > 1) states, the effort-reward ratio (ERR) significantly and positively predicted job burnout. 2) Self-control ability served as a moderator in the relationship between the effort-reward imbalance level and job burnout among higher vocational college teachers. Specifically, under effort-reward balanced conditions (0 < ERR < 1), self-control ability showed a positive moderating effect; whereas under imbalanced conditions (ERR > 1), it demonstrated a negative moderating effect. This study elucidates the impact and underlying mechanisms of the effort-reward imbalance on job burnout among teachers in higher vocational colleges, providing practical implications for mitigating job burnout in this population.

Key words: effort-reward imbalance, job burnout, self-control, teachers in higher vocational colleges

梁瑜倩, 李锐, 屈智勇, 傅王倩. 高职教师付出−获得不平衡水平与职业倦怠的关系：自我控制能力的调节作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2025, 23(3): 423-429.

Yuqian LIANG, Rui LI, Zhiyong QU, Wangqian FU. The Relationship Between the Effort-Reward Imbalance Level and Job Burnout Among Teachers in Higher Vocational Colleges: Self-Control Ability as a Moderator[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(3): 423-429.

图/表 6

参考文献 0

	鲍威, 吴红斌. 象牙塔里的薪资定价: 中国高校教师薪资影响机制. 北京大学教育评论, 2016, 14 (2): 113- 132. DOI
	卜南音, 李祚山, 朱小丹. 负性生活事件对大学生情绪性进食的影响: 自我控制的中介作用和自尊的调节作用. 心理研究, 2024, 17 (6): 554- 561.
	范伟, 任梦梦, 张文洁, 钟毅平. 反馈对自我欺骗的影响: 来自ERP的证据. 心理学报, 2022, 54 (5): 481- 496.
	范伟, 钟毅平, 李慧云, 孟楚熠, 游畅, 傅小兰. 欺骗判断与欺骗行为中自我控制的影响. 心理学报, 2016, 48 (7): 845- 856.
	郭永松, 李秀央, 卢文军, Siegrist, J. 工作中付出-获得不平衡与健康的相关性研究. 中华劳动卫生职业病杂志, 2005, 23 (3): 232- 234. DOI
	计荣. 高职教师工作压力源自何处. 职业技术教育, 2013, 34 (27): 72- 74. DOI
	贾轶, 许雪峰. 高职院校教师职业倦怠现状及对策研究——以C学院为例. 滁州学院学报, 2022, 24 (1): 131- 136. DOI
	金莱. 社会支持对高职教师工作压力和职业倦怠关系的调节作用研究. 中国职业技术教育, 2013, 29 (7): 87- 89, 92.
	林莉萍, 张祥兰. 高职教师胜任特征要素的实证分析. 现代教育管理, 2014, (12): 66- 69. DOI
	罗殿宏, 田翠英. 职业教育“双师型”教师资格认定的“结”与“解”. 职业技术教育, 2024, 45 (24): 30- 35. DOI
	潘君利, 左瑞勇, 汤永隆, 邓丽俐. 民办园教师的职业倦怠与其心理健康的关系. 学前教育研究, 2009, (3): 53- 55.
	谭树华, 郭永玉. 大学生自我控制量表的修订. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2008, 16 (5): 468- 470.
	田瑾, 毛亚庆, 熊华夏. 变革型领导对教师职业倦怠的影响: 社会情感能力和幸福感的链式中介作用. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37 (5): 743- 751.
	汪国琴, 陈进, 杨文圣. 教师职业压力与心理健康状况调查报告——基于上海地区的调研. 思想理论教育, 2016, (3): 86- 91.
	王海军. 职业学校教师心理压力的来源和缓解途径. 校园心理, 2011, 9 (4): 253- 254. DOI
	王秋林, 杨鹏, 陶宝乐, 颜军. 我国篮球高水平裁判员自我控制与情绪稳定性的关系: 心境状态与心理弹性的链式中介作用. 体育与科学, 2021, 42 (6): 86- 95.
	王晓蕾, 周萍, 任蔚虹, 李鲁. 护士付出-获得不平衡对护士离职意愿影响研究. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2010, 30 (4): 459- 462.
	王芸萍, 朱麟, 杜慧, 刘聪慧. 自我同情和睡眠质量的关系: 积极和消极情绪与自我控制的中介作用. 心理科学, 2022, 45 (4): 785- 793.
	温忠麟, 黄彬彬, 汤丹丹. 问卷数据建模前传. 心理科学, 2018, 41 (1): 204- 210.
	伍新春, 齐亚静, 余蓉蓉, 臧伟伟. 中小学教师职业倦怠问卷的进一步修订. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2016, 24 (5): 856- 860.
	尤玉钿, 曹科岩. 高职院校教师心理所有权对工作投入的影响研究. 高教探索, 2018, (10): 79- 83. DOI
	章永, 魏欣. 特殊教育教师幸福感与职业倦怠、心理健康的关系——以四川省特殊学校为例. 基础教育, 2014, 11 (5): 70- 75. DOI
	朱雯珊. “双高计划”背景下高职院校教师发展中心功能定位与实施路径研究. 职教论坛, 2021, 37 (10): 85- 89.
	Baumeister, R. F. Ego depletion and self-regulation failure: A resource model of self-control. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 2003, 27 (2): 281- 284. DOI
	Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects. New York: Harper & Row.
	Brebner, J. Happiness and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 1998, 25 (2): 279- 296. DOI
	Cheung, T. T. L., Gillebaart, M., Kroese, F., & De Ridder, D. Why are people with high self-control happier? The effect of trait self-control on happiness as mediated by regulatory focus. Frontiers in Psychology, 2014, 5, 722.
	Chirico, F. Job stress models for predicting burnout syndrome: A review. Annali dell’Istituto Superiore di Sanità, 2016, 52 (3): 443- 456.
	Diekmann, K., Böckelmann, I., Karlsen, H. R., Lux, A., & Thielmann, B. Effort-reward imbalance, mental health and burnout in occupational groups that face mental stress. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2020, 62 (10): 847- 852. DOI
	Freudenberger, H. J. Staff burn-out. Journal of Social Issues, 1974, 30 (1): 159- 165. DOI
	Gluschkoff, K., Elovainio, M., Kinnunen, U., Mullola, S., Hintsanen, M., Keltikangas-Järvinen, L., & Hintsa, T. Work stress, poor recovery and burnout in teachers. Occupational Medicine, 2016, 66 (7): 564- 570. DOI
	Guo, L. P., Huang, M. M., Wang, Y. Q., Shi, S., Yang, M. H., & Shuai, J. Effort-reward imbalance and job burnout in preschool teachers: A moderated mediation model. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 2022, 50 (1): 1- 13.
	Hofmann, W., Luhmann, M., Fisher, R. R., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. Yes, but are they happy? Effects of trait self-control on affective well-being and life satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 2014, 82 (4): 265- 277. DOI
	Jeon, L., Buettner, C. K., & Hur, E. Preschool teachers’ professional background, process quality, and job attitudes: A person-centered approach. Early Education and Development, 2016, 27 (4): 551- 571. DOI
	Layton, R. L., & Muraven, M. Self-control linked with restricted emotional extremes. Personality and Individual Differences, 2014, 58, 48- 53. DOI
	Lehr, D., Koch, S., & Hillert, A. Where is (im)balance? Necessity and construction of evaluated cut-off points for effort-reward imbalance and overcommitment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2010, 83 (1): 251- 261. DOI
	Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). Maslach Burnout Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
	Mitchell, J. Living a lie: Self-deception, habit, and social roles. Human Studies, 2000, 23 (2): 145- 156. DOI
	Pilcher, J. J., & Bryant, S. A. Implications of social support as a self-control resource. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2016, 10, 228.
	Ren, M. M., Zhong, B. W., Fan, W., Dai, H. M., Yang, B., Zhang, W. J., … Zhan, Y. L. The influence of self-control and social status on self-deception. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018, 9, 1256. DOI
	Rutter, M. Implications of resilience concepts for scientific understanding. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2006, 1094 (1): 1- 12. DOI
	Siegrist, J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1996, 1 (1): 27- 41. DOI
	Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Historical and current perspectives on stress and health (pp. 261–291). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
	Siegrist, J., Starke, D., Chandola, T., Godin, I., Marmot, M., Niedhammer, I., & Peter, R. The measurement of effort-reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Social Science & Medicine, 2004, 58 (8): 1483- 1499.
	Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 2004, 72 (2): 271- 324. DOI
	Timerbulatov, I. F., Khabibullina, I. R., & Tulitbaeva, G. F. Self-regulation as a way to prevent professional burnout of teachers of higher education institutions. SHS Web of Conferences, 2021, 113, 00086. DOI
	Tversky, A., & Griffin, D. (1991). Endowment and contrast in judgments of well-being. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 101–118). New York: Pergamon Press.
	Unterbrink, T., Hack, A., Pfeifer, R., Buhl-Grießhaber, V., Müller, U., Wesche, H., … Bauer, J. Burnout and effort-reward-imbalance in a sample of 949 German teachers. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 2007, 80 (5): 433- 441. DOI

	1	2	3
1.付出−获得平衡状态(0<ERR<1)
2.付出−获得不平衡状态(ERR>1)
3.职业倦怠	0.52***	0.44***
4.自我控制能力	−0.31***	−0.19***	−0.31***

	1	2	3
1.付出−获得平衡状态(0<ERR<1)
2.付出−获得不平衡状态(ERR>1)
3.职业倦怠	0.52***	0.44***
4.自我控制能力	−0.31***	−0.19***	−0.31***

	职业倦怠
	M1	M2	M3	M4
	β	β	β	β
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)	0.52***	0.46***	0.38***	0.36***
自我控制能力		−0.20***	−0.22***	−0.21***
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)×自我控制能力			0.21***	0.22***
性别				0.04
年龄				0.06
婚姻状态				−0.00
学校类型−“双高型” 高职院校				−0.03
学校类型−省示范性高职院校				−0.00
学历				−0.07*
所学专业与工作匹配程度				−0.10**
行政职务−副科				0.05
行政职务−正科				0.06
行政职务−副处及以上				0.07*
工作性质−教学科研				0.02
工作性质−行政人员				0.05
教龄				−0.17**
是否坐班				0.01
年税后总收入				−0.01
R²	0.27	0.30	0.34	0.38
∆R²	0.27	0.03	0.04	0.04
F	230.86***	137.69***	109.86***	21.07***

	职业倦怠
	M1	M2	M3	M4
	β	β	β	β
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)	0.52***	0.46***	0.38***	0.36***
自我控制能力		−0.20***	−0.22***	−0.21***
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)×自我控制能力			0.21***	0.22***
性别				0.04
年龄				0.06
婚姻状态				−0.00
学校类型−“双高型” 高职院校				−0.03
学校类型−省示范性高职院校				−0.00
学历				−0.07*
所学专业与工作匹配程度				−0.10**
行政职务−副科				0.05
行政职务−正科				0.06
行政职务−副处及以上				0.07*
工作性质−教学科研				0.02
工作性质−行政人员				0.05
教龄				−0.17**
是否坐班				0.01
年税后总收入				−0.01
R²	0.27	0.30	0.34	0.38
∆R²	0.27	0.03	0.04	0.04
F	230.86***	137.69***	109.86***	21.07***

	职业倦怠
	M1	M2	M3	M4
	β	β	β	β
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)	0.41***	0.42***	0.27***	0.27***
自我控制能力		0.02	0.05	0.07
付出−获得不平衡比率 (0<ERR<1)×自我控制能力			−0.27***	−0.28***
性别				0.02
年龄				−0.11
婚姻状态				0.02
学校类型−“双高型”高职院校				0.01
学校类型−省示范性高职院校				0.08
学历				0.20
所学专业与工作匹配程度				−0.04
行政职务−副科				0.01
行政职务−正科				0.06
行政职务−副处及以上				0.01
工作性质−教学科研				0.07
工作性质−行政人员				0.02
教龄				−0.02
是否坐班				0.02
年税后总收入				0.07
R²	0.17	0.17	0.22	0.25
∆R²	0.17	0.00	0.05	0.04
F	84.73***	42.41***	38.19***	7.44***